Paul Jay, senior correspondant of the Real News Network, reports from Jerusalem on the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Good Stuff.
Side note on the Real News:
This is one of the best sources you can find. They have developed a very successful, user-funded finance-model (no corporate dollars or ads) and plan to air on cable and satellite networks in the coming future. News like this is hard to come by these days! Check them out (http://www.therealnews.com), and donate some money if you like what you see. This is how we can save democracy.
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Friday, April 9, 2010
Monday, November 30, 2009
How to Change a Culture: Question of Imperialists
What is the U.S. military's goal in Afghanistan? This is a difficult question to answer. It ought to puzzle the most intellectual of minds because no single response could make sense entirely. The American Revolution was a conflict to break from the bondage of an empire. The Civil War was a battle for national identity and unity. World War II had a concrete objective: to defeat fascist aggressors in Europe, and end Japanese imperialism. These are wars with clear objective and victory.
Afghanistan on the other hand? We invaded to destroy Al Qaeda, but we remain to rebuild a nation. What could this possibly mean? No one knows, apparently. The fact that we support its shameful democracy is proof of our misdirected efforts. The U.S.-backed Karzai Administration casts an inescapable shadow of corruption over the entire government. Scandal and fraud have plagued his recent reelection, delegitimizing the very democracy we have set in place.
Corruption aside, this sham of a government does not seem to be a whole lot better than Taliban rule. A provision in legislation passed this April states: "...a wife is obliged to fulfill the sexual desires of her husband..." What this could mean I do not know, though some have said this law essentially condones rape. Mastermind of the law, Ayatollah Mohammed Asef Mohseni (yes, Ayatollah), defends the statute by refuting Western analysis, and claiming that married women do indeed have the right to refuse sex, though "If a woman says no, the man has the right not to feed her." Oh okay, cool. All cleared up. Thanks Asef!
But the perverted and broken government of Afghanistan are actually not my primary arguments against the war. No, my critique is one against the imperialist mind. We Americans are, after all, imperialists, plain and simple. Two countries we now occupy (facilitated by foreign mercenaries... ask me), with hundreds upon hundreds of military installations throughout the world... the aggressors in over 200 conflicts since 1945. We alone determine global economic policy.
Living in the Empire has many perks, I must say. I've had a privileged life (though not without my parents' comprehensive health insurance plan) and we are all blessed with relatively few foreign attacks (with two days of exception, of course). This country is somehow able to wage endless wars without the public even remembering! A miracle? Must be! "A million Iraqis died? Oh, hey did you see that new iPhone app? Pretty sweet, huh. Tiger Woods had an affair? What sport does he play again? Hey, pass the cocaine. And hand me that silly as shit magazine. Yeah, the one about nothing."
When I bring up Afghanistan in public, I most often get a "remember 9/11" line or some defensive variation of our "moral duty" to save those people over there. Who are they again? Also popular is the "we broke it, we bought it" line. These latter defenses seem silly to me, though they are common to the 'moral' imperialists. To address the 9/11-imperialists: Al Qaeda does not even need Afghanistan because they have such a wonderful home in Pakistan to conduct operations. Al Qaeda left long ago, and if they ever returned from over the Kush Mountains, they would not have nearly comparable resources as they had further East.
The 'moral' imperialists talk about some kind of higher responsibility to save these people. But really we should not be meddling in such drastic ways in foreign lands at all. It is just so imperial to believe in your state's sole right to wage devastating wars and heartless occupations in the name of Freedom. That is not Freedom, that is tyranny. President Washington would be ashamed. Jefferson too. Barack Obama says we are fighting for something just, but is it 'just' to impede on another's sovereignty? To be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands? What American cares about those people? Please, tell me if you do!
We are trying to change cultures. Cultures that are so unlike ours we cannot imagine. We do not understand--or even bother to understand--the Muslim world. Perhaps we never will. The West spent many centuries fighting its own religious wars, yet we seem to believe it is possible for a foreign occupation to end ideological feuds in a matter of years. It cannot be done, and thus we have no business in such affairs.
Afghanistan on the other hand? We invaded to destroy Al Qaeda, but we remain to rebuild a nation. What could this possibly mean? No one knows, apparently. The fact that we support its shameful democracy is proof of our misdirected efforts. The U.S.-backed Karzai Administration casts an inescapable shadow of corruption over the entire government. Scandal and fraud have plagued his recent reelection, delegitimizing the very democracy we have set in place.
Corruption aside, this sham of a government does not seem to be a whole lot better than Taliban rule. A provision in legislation passed this April states: "...a wife is obliged to fulfill the sexual desires of her husband..." What this could mean I do not know, though some have said this law essentially condones rape. Mastermind of the law, Ayatollah Mohammed Asef Mohseni (yes, Ayatollah), defends the statute by refuting Western analysis, and claiming that married women do indeed have the right to refuse sex, though "If a woman says no, the man has the right not to feed her." Oh okay, cool. All cleared up. Thanks Asef!
But the perverted and broken government of Afghanistan are actually not my primary arguments against the war. No, my critique is one against the imperialist mind. We Americans are, after all, imperialists, plain and simple. Two countries we now occupy (facilitated by foreign mercenaries... ask me), with hundreds upon hundreds of military installations throughout the world... the aggressors in over 200 conflicts since 1945. We alone determine global economic policy.
Living in the Empire has many perks, I must say. I've had a privileged life (though not without my parents' comprehensive health insurance plan) and we are all blessed with relatively few foreign attacks (with two days of exception, of course). This country is somehow able to wage endless wars without the public even remembering! A miracle? Must be! "A million Iraqis died? Oh, hey did you see that new iPhone app? Pretty sweet, huh. Tiger Woods had an affair? What sport does he play again? Hey, pass the cocaine. And hand me that silly as shit magazine. Yeah, the one about nothing."
When I bring up Afghanistan in public, I most often get a "remember 9/11" line or some defensive variation of our "moral duty" to save those people over there. Who are they again? Also popular is the "we broke it, we bought it" line. These latter defenses seem silly to me, though they are common to the 'moral' imperialists. To address the 9/11-imperialists: Al Qaeda does not even need Afghanistan because they have such a wonderful home in Pakistan to conduct operations. Al Qaeda left long ago, and if they ever returned from over the Kush Mountains, they would not have nearly comparable resources as they had further East.
The 'moral' imperialists talk about some kind of higher responsibility to save these people. But really we should not be meddling in such drastic ways in foreign lands at all. It is just so imperial to believe in your state's sole right to wage devastating wars and heartless occupations in the name of Freedom. That is not Freedom, that is tyranny. President Washington would be ashamed. Jefferson too. Barack Obama says we are fighting for something just, but is it 'just' to impede on another's sovereignty? To be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands? What American cares about those people? Please, tell me if you do!
We are trying to change cultures. Cultures that are so unlike ours we cannot imagine. We do not understand--or even bother to understand--the Muslim world. Perhaps we never will. The West spent many centuries fighting its own religious wars, yet we seem to believe it is possible for a foreign occupation to end ideological feuds in a matter of years. It cannot be done, and thus we have no business in such affairs.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Resistance to Afghanistan War Grows
This logic makes sense to me!
"When I voted to use force to go to war after 9/11, I think I and everyone else in Congress voted to go after Al Qaida. That was our enemy. And Al Qaida has now moved to a different neighborhood, in Pakistan, where, quite frankly, they're more protected. And we're told by Gen. Jones that there are less than 100, if that, members of Al Qaida left in Afghanistan... So we're now saying we should have 100,000 American forces to go after less than 100 members of Al Qaida in Afghanistan? I think we need to re-evaluate our policy."-- Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA)
"When I voted to use force to go to war after 9/11, I think I and everyone else in Congress voted to go after Al Qaida. That was our enemy. And Al Qaida has now moved to a different neighborhood, in Pakistan, where, quite frankly, they're more protected. And we're told by Gen. Jones that there are less than 100, if that, members of Al Qaida left in Afghanistan... So we're now saying we should have 100,000 American forces to go after less than 100 members of Al Qaida in Afghanistan? I think we need to re-evaluate our policy."-- Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA)
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Pressure of Peace
While I'm not sure I understand exactly why the Nobel Committee in Norway decided upon Barack Obama as winner of the Peace Prize so early in the game, I'd like to try and imagine the potential of this strategic gesture.
This award is a call of expectations of the freshman President. It is also a vote of confidence in the American electorate. You see, President Bush changed the world forever-- he began a war of fear and intimidation. He destabilized entire regions of the globe, and caused Iran to rush to arms. Mr. Bush was a President for war, and one who reflected the values of the imperial elites of the United States.
But America said no, and elected a man who promised peace. For this, every American deserves this award because it is WE who determine our country's policies and rulers. We chose peace, and this seems to have been recognized by members of the international community.
Now the pressure of the world is on, and the world demands a peaceful USA. But it is vital that we ask ourselves: what does their opinion matter? Why should we listen to the desires of other states?
These are common questions-- and they are fair questions. We are a sovereign state with the power to act in whichever way we see fit. But what must not be forgotten is that because of our extraordinary wealth, power and influence, our choices ripple throughout the world in ways that we cannot imagine. It is easy for American to lose touch of global realities because we are essentially an island. We are not surrounded by nations with ancient traditions of conflict. We do not know what it was like to be invaded and occupied by brutal militaries. We cannot fathom the imagery of a holocaust in our backyard.
The fact of the matter is that there are deep global problems that cannot be solved without an engaged, informed United States. Europe understands it. We seem to be realizing it.
While Americans are essentially a peace-loving people, they are
also a distant, and easily convinced people. We are duped into wars of "liberation" and "freedom." We want peace, but our fault lies in the belief that war solves all problems. That war yields peace.
Some of our allies across the pond understand that if the people of the United States of America do not break free from the bondage of the industrial-military complex, we will go the way of all empires. Our potential to do remarkable things will wilt away, and the story of American democracy will be mere whispers of legend.
So let us unleash ourselves from this militaristic society. Let us fight in ways we haven't yet thought. Let us take the Nobel Prize and show everyone that we can be with the world, not at odds with it.
People, call your congressmen and women and senators--tell them where you stand. President Obama, fight those generals and do what is right. Be strong and call your people to action. We'll fight with you.
Or against you.
This award is a call of expectations of the freshman President. It is also a vote of confidence in the American electorate. You see, President Bush changed the world forever-- he began a war of fear and intimidation. He destabilized entire regions of the globe, and caused Iran to rush to arms. Mr. Bush was a President for war, and one who reflected the values of the imperial elites of the United States.
But America said no, and elected a man who promised peace. For this, every American deserves this award because it is WE who determine our country's policies and rulers. We chose peace, and this seems to have been recognized by members of the international community.
Now the pressure of the world is on, and the world demands a peaceful USA. But it is vital that we ask ourselves: what does their opinion matter? Why should we listen to the desires of other states?
These are common questions-- and they are fair questions. We are a sovereign state with the power to act in whichever way we see fit. But what must not be forgotten is that because of our extraordinary wealth, power and influence, our choices ripple throughout the world in ways that we cannot imagine. It is easy for American to lose touch of global realities because we are essentially an island. We are not surrounded by nations with ancient traditions of conflict. We do not know what it was like to be invaded and occupied by brutal militaries. We cannot fathom the imagery of a holocaust in our backyard.
The fact of the matter is that there are deep global problems that cannot be solved without an engaged, informed United States. Europe understands it. We seem to be realizing it.
While Americans are essentially a peace-loving people, they are
also a distant, and easily convinced people. We are duped into wars of "liberation" and "freedom." We want peace, but our fault lies in the belief that war solves all problems. That war yields peace.
Some of our allies across the pond understand that if the people of the United States of America do not break free from the bondage of the industrial-military complex, we will go the way of all empires. Our potential to do remarkable things will wilt away, and the story of American democracy will be mere whispers of legend.
So let us unleash ourselves from this militaristic society. Let us fight in ways we haven't yet thought. Let us take the Nobel Prize and show everyone that we can be with the world, not at odds with it.
People, call your congressmen and women and senators--tell them where you stand. President Obama, fight those generals and do what is right. Be strong and call your people to action. We'll fight with you.
Or against you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
